The preservation of India's architectural heritage often intersects with legal frameworks, administrative protocols, and community sentiments. A recent directive by the Allahabad High Court concerning the whitewashing of the historic Jama Masjid in Sambhal, Uttar Pradesh, exemplifies these complexities. This case sheds light on the responsibilities of governmental bodies like the Archaeological Survey of India (ASI) and the roles of local management committees in maintaining heritage sites.
Historical Context of Jama Masjid, Sambhal
The Jama Masjid in Sambhal is a significant monument, reflecting the rich cultural and religious history of the region. Established centuries ago, it has served as a central place of worship for the local Muslim community and stands as a testament to the architectural prowess of its era. Recognizing its historical and cultural importance, the mosque has been under the purview of preservation agencies to ensure its structural integrity and aesthetic appeal.
The 1927 Agreement: Defining Maintenance Responsibilities
In 1927, an agreement was formalized between the mosque's management committee and the then-government, delineating the responsibilities for the mosque's upkeep. According to this accord, the ASI was entrusted with the structural preservation of the mosque, while the mosque committee was responsible for routine maintenance tasks, including cleaning and whitewashing. This agreement has been the cornerstone guiding the conservation efforts and responsibilities associated with the mosque.
Recent Developments Leading to Legal Intervention
In anticipation of the upcoming Ramzan festivities, the mosque management committee sought permission from the ASI in late 2024 to undertake whitewashing and decorative lighting of the mosque's exterior. The committee emphasized that these activities were routine and essential for the mosque's upkeep, aligning with the provisions of the 1927 agreement. However, the ASI's lack of response to this request led the committee to approach the Allahabad High Court for intervention.
Allahabad High Court's Directive
On March 12, 2025, Justice Rohit Ranjan Agarwal of the Allahabad High Court issued a directive to the ASI to commence and complete the whitewashing of the Jama Masjid within one week. The court stipulated that the mosque management committee would bear the costs incurred for this activity, in accordance with the 1927 agreement. Furthermore, the court permitted the installation of decorative lighting on the mosque's exterior, provided no structural alterations were made.
ASI's Position and Court's Response
During the proceedings, the ASI, represented by Advocate Manoj Kumar Singh, contended that unauthorized whitewashing by the mosque committee over the years had led to damage to the mosque's exterior walls. The ASI argued that such activities compromised the monument's structural integrity and historical authenticity. In response, Justice Agarwal reprimanded the ASI for its inaction over the years, questioning why the agency had not intervened earlier if the whitewashing was indeed causing harm. The court's rebuke highlighted the ASI's perceived negligence in fulfilling its custodial duties.
Legal Challenges to the 1927 Agreement
Advocate Hari Shankar Jain, representing an opposing faction, challenged the validity of the 1927 agreement, asserting that it was outdated and required reevaluation in the current context. However, the court deferred this challenge, stating that such objections would be considered in subsequent proceedings. This indicates the judiciary's intent to address immediate conservation concerns while acknowledging the need for a comprehensive review of historical agreements governing monument preservation.
Implications for Heritage Conservation
This case underscores several critical aspects of heritage conservation in India:
Clarification of Roles and Responsibilities: The court's directive reinforces the importance of adhering to established agreements, ensuring that both governmental bodies and community organizations understand and execute their respective duties in monument maintenance.
Judicial Oversight: The judiciary's intervention reflects its pivotal role in resolving disputes related to heritage conservation, especially when administrative bodies fail to act promptly.
Community Involvement: By allowing the mosque committee to fund and participate in the whitewashing process, the court acknowledges the community's vested interest in preserving their cultural and religious heritage.
Preservation vs. Restoration: The ASI's concerns about potential damage from unauthorized maintenance activities highlight the delicate balance between preserving a monument's authenticity and facilitating necessary restorative actions.
Conclusion
The Allahabad High Court's directive to the ASI to expedite the whitewashing of Sambhal's Jama Masjid within a stipulated timeframe emphasizes the need for timely and collaborative efforts in heritage conservation. It brings to light the challenges inherent in maintaining historical structures, especially when multiple stakeholders with varying interests are involved. Moving forward, this case may serve as a precedent for refining policies and agreements to ensure the effective preservation of India's rich architectural legacy, balancing bureaucratic procedures with community aspirations.
0 Comments
Thank you for your response. It will help us to improve in the future.